India bans MasterCard from adding new customers • Hacker News Board

Re: India bans MasterCard from adding new customers

#171

Post by kspacewalk2 » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 1:28 PM UTC

jollybean wrote: post #164

kspacewalk2 wrote: post #28

The obsession with where data physically sits at rest is so amusing to me. Not limited to overzealous governments and financial data; healthcare is singularly obsessed with this. It makes no sense whatsoever, of course. I'd much rather store properly encrypted personal information or financial data in North Korea than storing it unencrypted in my home country. I would understand if they demanded both storage and proc…

"Or am I missing something? " Jurisdiction is huge thing, not a side show. Data that sits overseas is subject to entirely different sets of laws which can conflict with local laws. Those laws also relate to espionage, and even outside the framework of legality ... it matters as well. It's a lot easier for the NSA to collect data on individuals if it's hosted in the US. I have absolutely no doubt that financial, legal…

Nothing in your comment invalidates these simple points:

1. If it's encrypted, it doesn't matter where it's stored.

2. If it's not encrypted, it can be easily stored in country X, processed in country X, but routed via SnoopHub in country Y. Country Y loves surveilling and is very happy about this state of affairs.

>I have absolutely no doubt that financial, legal and health records should simply not leave the local legal jurisdiction without consent and a few more things.

A very common attitude, usually held by people who "geographize" that which is not geographic in nature - the Internet.

Re: India bans MasterCard from adding new customers

#172

Post by kspacewalk2 » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 1:30 PM UTC

KorematsuFred wrote: post #134

kspacewalk2 wrote: post #28

The obsession with where data physically sits at rest is so amusing to me. Not limited to overzealous governments and financial data; healthcare is singularly obsessed with this. It makes no sense whatsoever, of course. I'd much rather store properly encrypted personal information or financial data in North Korea than storing it unencrypted in my home country. I would understand if they demanded both storage and proc…

I have been a party to some discussion around the laws with mid level government officials and this was a bit like an episode of Yes Minister. One of the government consultants spoke about "Data sovereignty". When someone asked what it meant he spoke for like 10 minutes without actually answering the question. "Data of Indians must belong to Indians", "Data is the gold of modern world" he then referred to various int…

I hope, for the sake of their sanity and ours, that they won't one day look into how routing of Internet traffic works.

Re: India bans MasterCard from adding new customers

#173

Post by jollybean » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 2:18 PM UTC

kspacewalk2 wrote: post #171

jollybean wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Or am I missing something? " Jurisdiction is huge thing, not a side show. Data that sits overseas is subject to entirely different sets of laws which can conflict with local laws. Those laws also relate to espionage, and even outside the framework of legality ... it matters as well. It's a lot easier for the NSA to collect data on individuals if it's hosted in the US. I have absolutely no doubt that financial, legal…

Nothing in your comment invalidates these simple points: 1. If it's encrypted, it doesn't matter where it's stored. 2. If it's not encrypted, it can be easily stored in country X, processed in country X, but routed via SnoopHub in country Y. Country Y loves surveilling and is very happy about this state of affairs. >I have absolutely no doubt that financial, legal and health records should simply not leave the local…

1) Your assertion that 'the data would be encrypted' is false.

There's no reason to believe that Visa/MC would simply use 'America' as a based to host dumb, encrypted data which enters and leaves the the US fully opaque. That would be pointless. Visa/MS are using services hosted in the US which will process customer data.

2) Statement #2 is also false. There is no arbitrary way for the US to snoop on data that doesn't flow through the US. For a whole variety of reasons - legal, operational, technical, political, cost etc.. Surely it can be done in a limited way, but at a level nowhere near the domestic capability.

3) Finally, you're statement on "geographizing" is also false.

Data, encrypted or not - falls under legal jurisdiction of the 'nation / geography' it's in, and this has many significant consequences. It makes a corporation subject to local laws, regulations, liabilities etc..

The internet is very geographic in nature.

Re: India bans MasterCard from adding new customers

#174

Post by zohch » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 3:04 PM UTC

passivate wrote: post #143

zohch wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes it fair and reasonable and does whatever rationale you use here not open up the door to further nativism? I mean if it is fair and reasonable that Indian transactions should be stored and processed in India, is it not also fair and reasonable that goods sold in India should be made in India, that movies that show in India should be made in India, that all news consumed in India should be written in India?…

> is it not also fair and reasonable that goods sold in India should be made in India, that movies that show in India should be made in India, that all news consumed in India should be written in India? Of course, thats what every country wants, and they develop policies that give tax breaks or concessions to local businesses. That's why tariffs were enacted. I'm sorry, I don't really get your point, maybe you can re…

It was a question as evidenced by the question marks.

Your answer, as far as I can discern, is that it "Of course" it is "fair and reasonable that goods sold in India should be made in India, that movies that show in India should be made in India, that all news consumed in India should be written in India."

That's all there is to it, question asked, and answered.

Re: India bans MasterCard from adding new customers

#175

Post by guiltygods » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 3:46 PM UTC

KorematsuFred wrote: post #136

mdasen wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To expand on this a bit, if you want leverage over companies like MasterCard, Visa, and American Express, it definitely helps to have the data in your jurisdiction. As you noted, they will shut off mobile internet to support the state. If Visa decides that it doesn't want to give the government data on someone's transactions, it helps to have that data in the country. "Oh, but the data is encrypted." Sure, but the co…

> Data residency gives a government willing to bully companies a lot of power. It's simply a lot harder to access information stored abroad and you have a lot less leverage. You have no clue how much uncontrolled power Indian government has today. This law is brought in to benefit telecom companies and real estate companies. https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/hiranand...

This argument is tenuous at most. Just because some companies are setting up data centers does not mean that Govt is deliberately forcing data residency to aid them.

It is ok for Europeans to insist on data residency within their shores but not for India? It is ok for Americans to insist on no data to be hosted in Chinese servers but not India?

Re: India bans MasterCard from adding new customers

#176

Post by toomuchtodo » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 4:50 PM UTC

IshKebab wrote: post #157

toomuchtodo wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even more reason to accelerate instant payment system rollouts to avoid private payment systems that charge interchange fees.

What instant payment systems? Are there actually viable competitors to Visa/MasterCard?

https://www.npci.org.in/what-we-do/upi/product-overview

Re: India bans MasterCard from adding new customers

#177

Post by darth_avocado » Thu, Jul 15, 2021, 6:35 PM UTC

throw998877123 wrote: post #121

darth_avocado wrote: post #109

It is really interesting that there's even a debate over this. US and EU have long had similar policies in the name of "national interest" or "protecting the consumers", but if other countries have similar policies, it suddenly becomes a negative thing. I think the hard reality of it is data needs to be localized, to ensure companies comply with local laws. Every country has independent authority on how they want to…

It would have been okay if the country had a good privacy protection law. And a not-so-broken justice system. The legal system wears you out starting right from the troubles of filing a police report (when needed). Having worked with the govt, they are pretty lame on security and high on convoluted regulations and harassment. The rules are applied selectively. As a fact, the govt (unintentionally) leaks the citizen's…

But data localization means the data is in a specific country, but the ownership still remains with the company. And I understand that the judicial systems can be flawed in different countries, but as a company, if you want to do business in a country, you still need to follow the law.

To give you an example, companies operate in China, despite not having great labor laws or environmental protection laws, or the threat of facing the govt.'s wrath any moment. That's because they want to do business in that country. It's the same with any company or country.

Re: India bans MasterCard from adding new customers

#178

Post by pankajdoharey » Fri, Jul 16, 2021, 7:26 PM UTC

mdasen wrote: post #66

signal11 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

India wants data residency because it wants to apply its own somewhat unique approach to law enforcement to all digital data — financial and otherwise. This is a country that switches off mobile data (3G and 4G) at the drop of a hat[1], and switched off an entire state’s mobile Internet access for 18 months [2]. This may appear unnecessary and capricious to some especially in the West. However I’m sure pro-Indian gov…

To expand on this a bit, if you want leverage over companies like MasterCard, Visa, and American Express, it definitely helps to have the data in your jurisdiction. As you noted, they will shut off mobile internet to support the state. If Visa decides that it doesn't want to give the government data on someone's transactions, it helps to have that data in the country. "Oh, but the data is encrypted." Sure, but the co…

India is fast turning into an Oligarchy where a few have all access. Indian government itself has been involved in selling the data of its citizens to private corporations. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/auto/auto-news...

Re: India bans MasterCard from adding new customers

#179

Post by fukd » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 6:01 AM UTC

guacathrowaway wrote: post #161

I am with mastercard on this one. Either they were asked to pay bribe and refused, which is good, or they genuinely care about their customers. In corrupt countries, such as India, politicians and local law “enforcement” love to get their hands in the pockets of honest and hard working people. And what easier way is there than having a card that provides details of the money you have in your pocket.

India has better financial system than USA/Europe. so they are not afraid to kick the monsters out of the country. Next is Visa

Re: India bans MasterCard from adding new customers

#180

Post by qwytw » Sat, Jul 17, 2021, 11:24 PM UTC

rfd4sgmk8u wrote: post #139

qwytw wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how would you enforce this if the state continues to have the monopoly on violence? Who would prevent it from banning doing the same thing Roosevelt did in 1933 (banning the private ownership of gold) (of course for crypto currencies they would ban the usage and ownership) or suspending the free market itself like in 1941?

And that is what is so wonderful about Satoshis great invention. The state has far less power over Mathematics, Cryptography and Game Theory. A gun is useless against ECDSA. A government cannot stop a person holding, saving, spending or transacting in bitcoin. As long as there is a channel, anywhere in the universe that allows submission of valid, signed transactions to peers, the state cannot stop it.

Sure it can, it can just ban crypto currencies and start fining all businesses which accept them and/or allow exchanging them for fiat currencies. While technically people still be able to transfer them I'm not sure how useful that would be in practical terms.